D&D 4E Our first playtest of 4E

[Gansk]

Do we know the effects of being prone? Does it cost you an action to get up from prone? Does it provoke an AoO (I refuse to use OA!!!)? Can you crawl while prone? Does that cost an action or AoO?

We know that crawling is at half movement rate, which implies that you are "in difficult terrain" and cannot shift one square without provoking an OA.

Standing up may have been reduced to a minor action - I think I've seen that somewhere.

 

[AverageCitizen]

1st level was always a hassle for me as a DM, until my most recent campaign I always had a hard time justifying why these characters, particularly in a setting as focused on backstory as eberron, were so inexperienced. For example. it suggests in the players guide to eberron that your character may be a veteran of the last war. For many of our concepts it was difficult to justify why the character would have failed to significantly distinguish himself until after the war was over. We felt it made more sense to start at level three in eberron.

My most recent home-brew campaign had the players start as apprentices of various kinds in a far-flung settlement, whose people had just barely learned how to smelt iron. Events surrounding the inevitable (somewhat violent) first-contact with the outside world caused them to become the first explorers from their village, charged with the task of finding out the heck was going on out there. In this context the players struggling to survive their first contact with their enemy and the dangerous passage through the mountains made perfect sense. They battled a boar and it was epic.

I think it really depends on how you want to run it. High powered first level characters aren't going to break 4e for me, but in some settings I'll most likely break it up into 2 or 3 levels of very quick progression, just as a nod towards the bumbling farm-hand hero concept. Even if I screw it up, it'll only last 3 levels, so no worries right?

ps. I think once we get the rulebooks it'll be pretty clear that you can't perform actions like wall of iron from prone. The power descriptions on the sheets are just that: power descriptions. Theres a lot more that we're missing. Thats why I am personally with holding judgement.

EDIT: Eberron only has one b. I can never remember that for some reason.

 

[Iron Sky]

Personally, I enjoy WoW, enjoy (some) anime, and had fun in most of my limited experiences with CCGs. When I here someone say the combat mechanics are video-game/anime-like/or CCG-like, I makes me think "cool!".

If I can have the combat system run like my favorite games/anime but in one of my worlds, with my story and players, I say right on.

With some of my games (especially the latest one where I actually have an organization of "Robot-Ninja-Assassins-With-Laser-Beam-Eyes" - a self-constructing army of constructs with lightning blast eye attacks, amongst other powers - as a primary foe) I think of it like an anime, or borrow and alter cool stuff I've seen in CRPGs/MMOs. *shrug*

Hooray for living in countries where we can get passionate about the semantics and mechanics of an imaginary world that hasn't even been released yet instead of worrying about when our next meals are or if the neighboring tribe/religious sect/country is going to kidnap and execute us in the middle of the night...

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Interesting recount. Thanks for it!

On strenght at lvl 1 and my take on it.

Remember that kobolds came close to annihilate the Cleric, hehe. Kobolds minions that are so feeble as to be destroyed by a single hit! (hehe) And that two of your encounters were close calls vs challenges appropriate for their lvl.

So they are not too powerful since the monsters also are more powerful.

They just have more options.

I think it will be fun to be able to have such exciting types of fights at lvl 1.

Right. I wasn't saying that each of the encounters was a breeze for them. All I was saying was that the characters were significantly more powerful than level 1 characters from earlier editions were. And some players felt as though beginning level characters should not have so much ability right from the start.

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Wait a sec... Are skeletons intelligent now in 4E??? Hows does a skeleton choose to back off? I've never played, nor seen played, an unintelligent creature (like a skeleton or zombie) make a decision like this. Sorry, that just struck me as odd.

Regarding the "are skeletons intelligent enough to do that" discussion,

I was of the opinion that the Boneshard Skeleton was the commander and was enough of a leader to command the troops around it.

I also wanted to give the fighter a chance to try out her class ability. Sucked for the skeleton that she rolled max damage with it.

In the review, I should not have said "the skeleton chose to", but rather "the big flaming skeleton ordered the wounded skeleton to back off", or maybe even "I chose to have the wounded skeleton back off" but hey, I was half asleep when I wrote the thing.


I honestly didn't think that semantics would elicit such a lively debate, but hey, I'm glad they did! It's good food for thought.

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Thanks for postig this playtest. I enjoyed reading it.

First level in first and second edition was partilucarly limited and the characters particularily frail. In third edition, first level characters got a bit more powerful and had a few more options. In fourth edition, first level characters will have even more hit points, healing and options.

For some players that will feel like a good change. For others it will feel like a bad change. I've had both types of players, some who hated the impotent feeling when starting at first level, and some who loved that stage and really built their connection to their character at that stage, fondly remembering their crazy exploits from the time they were barely competent to kill a house cat.

I remember in earlier editions, some groups liked to start at 0-level, with no special powers whatsoever, and build up to first level in a class. For those folks, the change of relatively powerful first level characters will be unwelcome. Perhaps all that is needed is an optional rule for 0-level characters with a weakened version of first level for each class, which a third party publisher could put out, and which such groups could use as an alternate starting place before moving onto first level. The optional 0-level characters could be given half normal hitpoints, only one instead of two at will class powers, and no daily class power. There you have it, rules for weaker 0-level characters to start out and get attached to before you get to 1st level.

Bingo. You hit the nail right on the head. For the group last night, the tactical options were a welcome change, but their implementation at first level was not.

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Thanks for posting that playtest, very interesting! I like how it highlighted both tactics, 'feel', and some interesting questions.

- As soon as you said the cleric ran up front I recoiled in horror, knowing what was about to happen with the kobold mob attack. I'm amazed he survived

Yeah, I thought for sure he would be toast. But... then I started rolling damage and the dice were in his favor. Couldn't get more than 5 points of damage on any swing.

- Tide of Iron from prone?! Wow! Part of me (the 3e part) thought "how silly", but the emerging 4e in me said "Cool!!" Really, what a great use of a tactic. 3e you have essentially no choice but suck up the AoAs. With the rule changes on prone just being -2 on attack and Combat advantage against you (-2), it's going to be more common to fight from prone perhaps. Perhaps "on the knee" is the new prone?

Indeed. It took a bit of deliberation and scouring of the available rules before I made the call to let her do it. Part of it was simply that it sounded cool, but the rules I had backed her on this one. Tide of Iron, as available, did not say that the fighter had to be standing up or able to shift into the next square. All of the information about prone did not say that "basic attack" was the only "attack" from prone. The information about "basic attack" and when it should be used did not mention prone.

I thought it was pretty wonky, and most likely we'll have better rules on attacking from prone once the actual book gets released. For now, it was a cool move that had every player cheering. That's just fine with me.

- Interesting to catch that Skeletons now have initiative, and an interesting question to how that might impact tactics. I don't think we're at all in the realm of "assume everthing is the same until proved differently", but looking at the extent of other changes, I think most bets are off until we see the 4e MM.

Yeah as I was reading their stat blocks and found that they had initiative mods, I went "whoa, nifty!"

- It was also nice to see how the characters were surprised by the monsters' special abilities. I've not seen that since 1st edition when as a player I wasn't "allowed" to read the Monster Manual! I expect many DMs and modules will subtly vary powers of monsters to constantly keep players on their toes.

Indeed, but that's just because of a first exposure to the monsters. After a couple of times fighting them, I'm sure the same "oh ok, then that thing will do X" will arise. It's the same with "ok, we're fighting trolls, get a torch" or "hey a beholder, aim for the central eye!" and what not. But, you're on to something with varying the same monsters abilities from fight to fight. I'm hoping that the MM will include rules to facilitate doing that while accurately gauging the power of the monster. We'll see.

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Do we know the effects of being prone? Does it cost you an action to get up from prone? Does it provoke an AoO (I refuse to use OA!!!)? Can you crawl while prone? Does that cost an action or AoO?

We know "some" of the effects of being prone, and possibly all of the effects of being prone. Yes. standing from prone costs a move action and does draw opportunity attacks. Yes you can crawl while prone at half movement as a move action. Crawling is essentially moving in difficult terrain, so you cannot shift while prone. As such, yes, if you leave a threatened area while prone, you will draw an opportunity attack.

If you allow Tide of Iron from prone, does this mean you get to automatically be standing? Or are you really still prone, on the ground, but bullrushing too? Would this be a loophole for AoOs or costing an action?

I treated this as no, she was not automatically standing. Tide of Iron is *not* a bull rush. It's similar, but it's not the same thing and does not follow, well, any of the rules for bull rushing. Keep in mind that Tide of Iron does not state that the fighter shifts into the square that her target was previously occupying, but rather states that the fighter "can" shift into that square.

In other words, if you successfully bullrush, you would move into the opponents square (and they would move back one). But this move wouldn't cost you anything, where normally, it might cost a move action. You see what I am getting at? Might be a minor loophole, but still. Not saying it's a bad thing, just pointing out there may be inconsistancies or loopholes or unintentional side effects within the rules again (like Cleaving off an AoO in 3E).

Again, Tide of Iron does not follow the rules for bull rushing. In the case of this combat, once the attack had successfully landed and the target had been pushed back from its original square, the fighter would not be able to shift into the target's square because you cannot shift in difficult terrain (which essentially is what crawling while prone is).

I do see what you're getting at, but I think it's a fundamental difference in how we are interpreting Tide of Iron. You seem to be of the opinion that the fighter must move forward as part of the power. I am of the opinion that the fighter does not have to move forward as part of the power.

And while I hope that there are no inconsistencies or loopholes, we all know that's wishful thinking. No new rules system is bulletproof.

It's interesting that you mention cleave, as its 4E version caused much more consternation among the group last night than the thought of using powers while prone. The fact that the attack did automatic damage to a second target was the source of the problem. I'm still mulling over what to do about that, or even if it's a big problem. Most people last night thought there should be, at the very least, some sort of attack roll involved. Maybe with bonuses or something.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Its quite harder for a person to houserule 1st level to make characters more like the common man.

Not even remotely. I propose (for those who like that sort of thing):

Level 1/4

--Start at 1/4 Level one HP (and surges and heal rate)
-- No second wind
--any damage will make you "bloodied"
--all your attacks, defences and skills are -4
--You may chose only one of your at-will powers (and it counts as an encounter power)
--you have no feat(s)
--chose one class ability, but not the "big one" (IE sneak attack for a rogue)

Level 1/2 250 BXP (Beginner's Experience)
- Half HP (and surges and heal rate)
- No second wind
- Bloodied at half (of half)
- attacks, skills, defences -2
- Get a other at-will power, but it's encounter
- get your encounter power (and it counts as a daily)
- gain the "big" class ability, but make it daily if it's an encounter power.

Level 3/4 500 BXP (Beginners Experience)
- 3/4 Level one HP (and surges and heal rate, get a second wind)
- Bloodied at half (of 3/4)
- attacks, skills, defences -1
- gain your "big" racial abiility (like fey step for an eladrin)
- get your at wills at-will

Level 1 1000 BXP, then start again at zero with REAL XP
- Gain your daily
- Set everything to what it should be for level one

Go to, Hero!

Fitz

 

[bjorn2bwild]

Great playtest post, OP.

From the rest of the thread, I'm gathering that some folks want 1st-level characters to be mundane, and monsters to be uninteresting.

I wouldn't necessarily group both of those trains of thought into the same category. Nobody in my gaming group wants uninteresting monsters. But, just about everybody in my gaming group likes beginning characters to be, well, beginners. The characters last night did not feel in any way like a beginner at any of their respective roles.

Maybe this is a simulationist holdover, where PCs grow from bumbling morons into heroes, and some monsters can't use tactics due to lack of an intelligence score. Myself, I prefer options and effectiveness from the get-go, and the ability for monsters to make interesting choices as well. Not only is this more fun for players, but the DM gets to make some tactical choices as well. I've always been of the opinion that flavor text is there as a guide for new or time-strapped DMs, not law.

Yeah you're pretty much right on there. One of my players last night said that if he wanted to just sit down at a table and have some meaningless fun, he'd go with this system the way it is (just like logging into an MMO, pulling out some lead and plastic for a miniatures wargame, strumming a plastic rocker switch on Rock Band, or busting out a deck for a CCG), he simply felt like he wouldn't develop a connection or have any care for his characters in this system.

When I compare the two differences presented here, one is obviously more fun that the other (IMHO). I'd be interested if the OP clarified with his players what they meant by the game not feeling like D&D. Did they mean it didn't feel like 3e, or it didn't feel like an RPG, or it didn't feel like fantasy roleplaying?

Anywho, good post and an interesting thread.

The combats certainly were more fun than most 3e combats I've been in, and definitely more fun than any 2e combats I was ever in.

The players last night said that playing the game felt like a "one shot" sort of thing, like a minatures wargame or a CCG fight. They didn't have any vested interest in any of their characters. Now, this might very well be because the characters were pre-constructed, there was little to no roleplay in the session, and it indeed was a one-shot sort of thing. All we wanted to do was "test drive" the new rules, nothing more.

It's quite probable that once people start building their own characters, developing backgrounds, actually doing some RP, and immersing themselves in a world--rather than just plopping miniatures on a table--they may come around.

Like I said in the beginning, nobody said "I don't like this game." Everybody had fun and everybody wanted to try it again once the books come out.